About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 152 (some duplicates have been removed)
qualified -- that is the point i wanted to make more globally. the problem is the state law definition of "candidate." we can add this section in local law, which is fine and whatever version ends up tonight or thereafter will work for the moment. but i think we should urge the state legislature to include an appointed office-holder, because that was the route of this to begin with. >> that we definitely can't do tonight? >> no, it's not on the calendar, but something that we could contemplate in future and i would suspect there is support for that. >> do you have other comments about what we can do here and now? >> sorry. thank you for bringing me back. i agree that the language in lines 19 and 20 are somewhat problematic. i don't know that they work into line 16-18. i think they really only apply in subsection b. i mean it's difficult to read 16-18 and imports 19 and 20 in, that the "order to support" language. it just gets a little circular, but i do agree that support should include actions or statements whether public or non-public. that are trying to urge or encourage a part
and it's a great day. thank you mayor. [applause] >> so local hire would not be the law of the city if not for the board of supervisors. i want to acknowledge the members that are here today. supervisor eric mar. [applause] -- the architect of our local hire law john avalos. [applause] and our board president david chiu who i would like to say a few words. [applause] >> good morning. on behalf of the board i am very happy to be part of the celebration of this milestone and just want to take a moment for all of us to look around this room. we talk about the diversity of san francisco, but it's not everyday that we come together in the way that we are this morning. i also want to start by thanking the warriors, management and your organization for playing ball with the city for making sure we are setting a standard for how we do privately funded projects and on behalf of the board i want to thank you for that and thank those that have been warriors for this concept to making sure local projects involve local employees. from the community partners and chinese for affirmative actio
of public notification in a timely manner. it is wrong with state law with regard of the sunshine act of the legislature or ceqa. there is no way in which the city or the city counties as administrative district of the state can pass a laws or even consider laws that violate state law. therefore shouldn't even be an item. i will submit a document that our lawyers, dewey fleshman, who has challenged similar circumstances with park merced and given the fact that you have experience with these violations it should not reoccur. >> i would like to remind all members of public the matter before the commission right now is the continuance of the items proposed, not the matter of the item itself, but just the continuance. >> eric brooks representing san francisco green party and the local grass-roots organization "our city". just a shout out in the room not familiar with planning department's process. this is the opportunity to speak on item 11 and i speak to the fact they am very glad to see for whatever reason you're continuing this, and the reason being that this legislation in a simila
there are some who have said that there are already laws in the books that cover this situation. that is simply not the case. which i whies berkeley, san joÉe and other california cities have their own public nudity restriction beyond the if there were already laws in place to address this situation, i would not have introduced this legislation. public nudity, currently, is not -- is legal in san francisco, other than in our parks, port, and in restaurants. there's been a suggestion that we should use lewd behavior laws, particularly the indecent exposure provisions of the california penal code. i don't agree with that. i think that using lewd behavior laws is problematic and ineffective. first of all, there are going to be a lot of borderline cases about whether something is lewd or not lewd and you're putting a police officer in a terrible position of trying to determine is this person a little bit aroused or not aroused, is that adornment on the person's genitals lewd or not lewd, did he shake his genitals a little too vigorously to draw attention. no police officer should make that determi
in the communications so it's not just the law enforcement agencies working in silos addressing their own jurisdictions. there aren't really real jurisdictions in law enforcement. they have to be sharing information collectively and that's from the top to the bottom. just specifically talking about the ipo, i think what's new and i think is more helpful than not is the focus with organizing and the community component so it's not just a community dealing and reacting to public safety, it's the community sharing information with and through law enforcement so that they are part of the discussion and really partners and how the city approaches what public safety is. am i answering the question? >> yes, and if you could explain how you have been able to implement an ipo strategy within, say, visitacion valley, has has this resulted in real communication and collaboration, what are the examples of your organization and the department and how they work together. >> i don't want to steal deanna's thunder, the stuff where you see literally on the streets where you are talking about specific streets and spec
on individual's rights and pursuit to happiness. many laws have been passed by the majority over years and ultimately based on bigotry and disgust and gay marriage and sodomy and many more. every time one of the laws is tested in court it has been eventually over turned. the same thing would happen here. it hurts no one. let's not pass it just because a few people find it disgusting. san francisco is about individual's rights and people come to the city to be who they are without concerns of bigging on tree and scorn. nudity is one more freedom that san francisco has championed. we took a step back with the towel law. let's not take another step backwards. i leave you with this quote from an rand. those that deny individual rights cannot be defenders for the majority. this legislation is using a sledge hammer to kill a flea. i urge you to vote no. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good morning. i am bruce dodea. as a child my father had a very racist sort of perspective on things. he felt that black people were bad people. i don't think that has a child i would ha
and the suggestion that we should use the lewd behavior laws and the indecent exposure laws is problematic and ineffectual. it's unclear that cock rings and other behaviors that we see would qualify as lewd. i think it's border line as best and it's a terrible position for police officers to enforce the following. is his penis slightly erect or not at all? i don't think any police officer is ever going to make that determination and i don't think we want them to. is that adornment lewd or not? did he shake his genitals to make it lewd or was it accidental? no police officer is going to make that determination. in addition if we start encouraging to treat border line lewd behavior as indecent exposure that is a automatic misdemeanor conviction if convicted and lifetime sex registry. i don't think we should do that. this legislation would not lead to sex offender registration and unlike the parks code it can be charged as an infraction indefinitely. now the police and the da will have an option to charge that. mr. chairman, as i stated at the beginning i gave this issue time to wor
of facts and conclusions of law. and so i was just wondering what was exactly contemplated by that? is that something written or just orally? when the vote is taken? it's sort of a companion question to commissioner renne's point and then i see later in section e, under "orders," it says, "the commission will instruct staff to prepare written order reflecting the commission's findings." so then i was wondering if what was contemplated was the findings of fact and conclusions of law to be incorporated in that order, which we would instruct, based on our vote and finding, verbally. or is there a more extensive process that is contemplated with respect to preparing findings of fact and conclusions of law? >> i think they just contemplated the commission doing it during the hearing. >> okay. >> that was my understanding as well and certainly if it was a complicated issue where we wanted to make written findings and that the summary order was more involved, i think we could do more. but i think the idea is that we can hopefully make them orally to get to resolution quickly. >> yes
of affordability. this is -- this has been an ongoing issue for the past 30 years discriminatory zoning laws and how discriminatory zoning laws actually increase the cost of housing this is from the america university law journal from 1971 it's called discriminatory zoning the legal battle ground the 70's the subsequents of discriminatory zoning laws including larger lot requirements prohibition on multifamily housings and minimum floor area standards, serve to inflate land able vision and construction costs make developing of low and moderate income housings and uneconomical and raise rent and purchase prices of low and middle class wagererners and it would be hard pressed to find anything in the literature that speaks to the contrary and you would be hard pressed to show anything that shows these units rent for less than comparable rate unit and the cubickings projects is a good example it sold -- unit there sold for about 90 to 100% of the area median and this is one of the most under served market segments in the city and so with that, i ask you to reject this cap thank you. >> is ther
under current law. but i think the commission agreed that the raising and spending of that size of money was not designed by the voters to be something that went unregulated. so the commission directed the staff to put together some provisions that would, as i said, regulate committed are designed to draft, particularly those that raise tangible sums of money. the reason for that is that a citywide campaign aimed at a single person still reaches people citywide, and would conceivably impact their decisions at the polling place based on the fact that you get someone to run for office by extolling their virtues. so these rectally simple to follow will treat under our law, such campaigns, such committees, excuse me, as primarily formed campaigns and therefore, report their activities to the voters. >> they are divided into two diction points. does the commissioners have any questions with regards to decision point 1? i have a question and it has to do with our definition of "support." i have some concern that it's maybe a little too restrictive, because i could imagine someone simply s
father-in-law is in chinatown sro, too. my father-in-law's building had this bed bug infestation. when he goes to bed, all the bed bugs come out at night. so he got bitten pretty badly all over the neck, the head. he reported to the manager. the manager just did a real routine thing about the bed bugs. so my father-in-law went to chinatown cdc for help. so that was brought to the attention of the health department. so he couldn't even sleep well at night. so we are really hopeful that the legislation will help people to understand how they are treated and get better. we are living in a pretty bad situation once you have bed bugs. so we hope that we could get this legislation done really fast, so things will get better for us. we thank the supervisors to put such an emphasis on improving the environment for us. thank you. >> thank you. i'm going to call up a couple more name cards. [ reading speakers' names ] >> good afternoon supervisors, thank you, my name is jorge potio, a lifetime resident of san francisco and i want to start by recognizing the hard work that has been put into the
. which is very unfair. if you look at the federal law, -- you have to take a position, accept the law or not. allows the charge the minimum of 10 dollars, or allow us to have a signposted, only cash. is up to us. we lose the business. you don't. in the people don't have a credit card, we lose the business. >> marcelo fonseca, followed by --[indiscernible] . >> good afternoon sir. >> good afternoon i want to talk again on the -- illegal operation that ms. hyoshi talk about. she talk about a lot of things i want to say. i want to urge you to go after them. they are big threat to our industry. if i listen to you mr. [indiscernible] i don't think you can look the other way. they are threatened this industry. if you don't do anything about it, this medallion treasure could become worthless. they are a major threat to the industry. they are everywhere. they do as they please. it is not fair that we have so many rules and regulations to comply with and they roam the streets as they please. please keep the pressure on them. and to the best you can so we can survive in this industry. t
ways to enhance the state law for business improvement dikts and it would allow us to extend the term to 40 years when assessments are applied to pay for any bonds, or certificates of participation or similar obligations because under the state law, yes, we are allowed to issue bonds, assessment districts can issue the bonds, as well as the city can issue bonds and have them repaid by assessment district. but we wanted to clarify that if we are going to be issuing that kind of financing. we need a longer term than what is currently allowed in our enabling ordinance, it says right now up to 15 years. so in order to issue bonds, we would need to be able to go up to possibly 40 years in this case it is going to be 32. but the ordinance would be amended to allow the 40 years in the case of such financing. and then, the ordinance also would be amended to our article 15 is proposed to be amended to also authorize the board of supervisors to have a procedure to aestablishing business-based and a stronger flesh hold of voter participation for improvement districts and that would be optional a
that the seattle law is consistent with the first amendment. and, colleagues, i also want to mention that i'm still committed to finding policies that reduce yellow page blight and i'm working with the city attorney to hopefully draft new legislation to find alternate approaches to achieving the same goal. at this time, colleague, i hope you will be able to support this legislation in light of the 9th circuit. >> thank you. thank you, president chiu. supervisor wiener. >> i thank you and i want to thank president chiu for having pursued this legislation which i was happy to support and i was really saddened by the ninth slur circuit ruling. it seems that our federal courts more and more are fetishizing commercial and corporate speech. i fundamentally disagree with that. with that said, the current law is what it is and i will be reluctantly supporting this suspension and hope to revive legislation in the not too distant future. >> thank you. let's open this up for public comment. is there anyone from the public that would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. so, r colleagues, there
residents, and helping property owners to follow the law. and so this particular case of september 12 of this year, all the violations have been corrected and the building has been restored to a livable state for 48 families that reside on this property. so i want to take this time and acknowledge the members of our city family that actually make this happen. we can legislate law. we can talk about building code. but there are people that actually go out there and make that law reality for the residents here in san francisco. so i want to thank rosemary, james, james, david, and allen davidson. we want to recognize you today for your outstanding work protecting the basic living conditions of 48 san francisco families living at 245 leavenworth over the last three years. thank you for your leadership in abating 423 housing code+nc'p violations and restoring the building to a livable state for the residents. the board of supervisors extend its highest commendation and appreciation. thank you very much. >> supervisor, thank you very much for taking the time to thank the staff individuall
repeated several times to the members of this board. we also are required under the law to also provide notification if a merchant is working after hours, specifically. and in certain cases check with the san francisco police department to ensure that these facilities are appropriate. in this case, we believe that we are follow our procedures correctly and processed the permit accordingly. and also this specific decision was also a measured response in many ways to the previous decision through what was coffee and then to director given by this board itself. i really have nothing else to add. i am prepared to answer any questions that you may have. >> thank you. >> i am not sure that i would have equated you know, all of this coffee with quite with what we are talking about. i would say a more appropriate example is the discussion that we had on the hamburger truck nearby on what was it beal? or somewhere nearby. any way, that was more recent than the guiradelli square. the question that i have for you is when you look at the previous... some of the previous cases and locations, you did
of requests for information from law enforcement and other groups and the percentage of those requests that actually were granted. so that would also be information that will be shared with other agencies and with the public so that if law enforcement agencies want to gather fotion, gt -- information, that will be shared the number of times that happens over the year. that was something that was a big concern for the mtc so we removed that language and really feel that the mtc has been working well with us and with other stake holders to assure that there are actual new plans in place for how the privacy policy will be implemented and i want to thank the mtc in particular randy renschler, who is here, for your work on that. colleagues, if you have -- if there are comments or questions? i had originally thought that this resolution could go for adoption without committee reference but since we're talking about transparency and privacy policies it makes sense that we bring it to our committee in full disclosure. so let's open this item up for public comment. we do have mr. renschler h
being a commissioner and out smart everybody and the public needs to inform me about what the law says and what is going to happen under eir and ceqa law and i believe there are serious shortcuts being made here and addition to finding document full of vague language, innuendo, and conflikz of terms and terms are exchanged and don't mean anything. planning, planning commission, planning department. i'm not sure what it means and i could go on and on and refers to agencies in lower case without specifying who the agencies or public bodies would be that have to weigh in. the sequence of how meetings appeals, et cetera are described for three or four different appeals is totally confusing, and myself basically requests that we stretch it out further than the 29th of november. >> commissioner hillis. >> so i support the continuance to the 29th. i don't mind continuing it longer but i would like to start hearing from the public, the staff on the issues and request questions and not necessarily ask questions on the phone or email but actually have an airing of what is here and if we star
about and linger without lawful business and prohibited on any sidewalks or property adjacent to the licensed premise under the control of the licensee on the abc form 257. number eight, the petitioners are responsible for freeing of litter and with sufficient power and emlum nate and easily discernible of all personos the premises. no noise shall be audible beyond the area and control of the licensee as defined on the abc form 257. finally number 11, no one under 21 serve furnish or sell alcoholic beverages. thank you. >> thank you very much. is the applicant here? any public comment on this item? mr. yep. >> good morning supervisors. i notice on today's agenda there are actually three items dealing with liquor license so if i was a tourist of san francisco i would say that in san francisco, at least in relation to this committee there is nothing going on in san francisco except liquor licenses and we all know that is definitely not true. i would like to make a recommendation on two subject matters which in my opinion the city and county of san francisco has not done e
. ross mirkarimi did. we have a really horrible situation here. we have a high position, law enforcement officer, who committed a crime. then denied that a crime had been committed. then tried to mitigate his actions. then tried to blame others. and then put together a whole campaign to go after anybody that called it what it was, a crime. so, what is not being talked about here is the victims. the mayor indicated [speaker not understood]. we have had a surge in reports of domestic violence-related incidents. we've got women every day that are suffering in silence. we know how difficult it is for women to come forward. the reality is the majority never come forward. because they're afraid. and we're making it more difficult by playing games. so long as the district attorney in this county, i'm not going to play any game. this is not about politics. this is about public safety. and we're going to do the right thing. the mayor will do the right thing. and i'm going to let the mayor say a few words as well. (applause) >> if i may. thank you. thank you, george. the other thing, it's been tal
and sros eight, action item. nine, action item, proposed amendment to the mdc by laws. -- elven, multimodal accessibility committee update. eleven, public comment. that was 12, 13, correspondent, 14 councilmember comments and announcements. 15 adjourn. >> thank you. moving on the public comment agenda item number three. i have one speakers card here. our friends across the day ms. denise jacobson, with the oakland mayor's commission. we welcome you. anyone else who wishes to speak after her? please step forward. >> thank you. i'm very happy to be here today. i am the vice-chair of oakland's mayor's -- (off mic) (off mic) (indiscernible) >> excuse me ms. jacobson? would you please try to start over, and talk closer to the mic. >> okay. i am vice-chair of the mayor's commission on persons with disabilities. for the past year. we've been looking to -- problems of (indiscernible). we decided that we are going to -- >> what were the problems again? >> the -- are in poor condition. >> bart elevators. are in poor condition. >> who is they? >> the bart elevators. >> wonderful. >> this
they have control. loitering is defined to stand idle about without lawful business is prohibited to any property with the licensees as depicted on the form. number five. debris shall be removed from the premises within 74 hours of the application. if the graffiti happens on a holiday they shall remove it within 72 hours of the next weekday. the exterior of the premises shall have lighting and sufficient power to illuminate and make apparent the persons on the premises. additionally the position of the lighting shall not disturb the neighboring residents. number seven. no noise audible between the area of the licensee as defined on the abc form. number eight, the interior lighting is sufficient to make easily discernible and conduct of all persons and patrons in that portion of the premises where the alcohol beverages are sold and consumed. thank you. >> no issues with the eight months of operation at this place since they have been going beyond the issues here? >> everything has been fine? >> yes. >> it's a very interesting business model. is the owner or the applicant here?
laws because we have violence going on, i don't think that most people would agree with that. of course violence always needs to be top priority and i can tell supervisor campos how many times, in the castro, or in noe valley, we hear from mission station, listen, we have to deal with the violence in the mission, and that's top priority. and my constituents understand that, and they respect that, and i've never heard any of them push back against that. everyone knows dealing with violent crime is a top priority but that doesn't mean you can't deal with something because you want police to deal with violent crime. before the introduction of this legislation, like i said this is legislation, like i said this is going on'l people who the minute it started and we weighe waited two years. we tried to resolve this. it was not going to be resolved or moved forward. finally i want to address the issue of free expression. and we are a city of free expression, and it's very important to me and i know to all of us. i don't agree that having yellow your peenis at a busy street corner as people go b
's unsanitary to the max. they do not clean the public showers and the rest rooms by law, sanitation laws, they do not do, that sir. i can assure you on that. [speaker not understood] the trash half the time. there's been severe harassment of visitors that come to visit a tenant. i've been there five years myself, okay. and just i can move any time i want. there's no law against that. [speaker not understood]. the rent money i'm not receiving services i'm paying for. the elevator keeps breaking down every two weeks. they get it going [speaker not understood]. i know it sounds funny now. it wasn't funny then. the elevator service is ridiculous. they'll get it running and it breaks down two weeks later. and there's a lot of people in wheelchairs, on crutches, seniors, disabled, they have to crawl down the stairs and abandon their wheelchairs in the lobby because they cannot even get down the stairs. some of them live on the fourth floor with me. it's ridiculous. we do not appreciate our visitors and our guests being told by the management that we've been removed or we're not there. it's eit
think that should be addressed by looking at your currently existing pliewd behavior laws. we oppose that legislation. >> thank you very much. are there any other -- if anyone else would like to make public comment please come forward. yes. human or alien. >> my name is paul. hello panel and i just wanted to say i lived in san francisco for 42 years and there is no other place i would love because of san francisco's style and its charm and its difference and diversity, and i just wanted to address the a forementioned to the sea long little merraid at the cast ro. i was there one morn when it was going on and nude people. it was a glorious san francisco day, and i couldn't have been prouder of my city at that moment as i sat there and watched the healthy back and forth of families coming under ground and rush to see aerial and rushing past the naked people and everyday and so why we live in san francisco. i simply couldn't have been prouder. it struck me as extremely healthy and if you're concerned about the morals of your children discovering we're naked under our clothes maybe
. this lets them determine what to enforce the law rather than the complaints and many don't file a report. my money however will not go to a business that are oppose the politicians and my vote won't go to politicians that do this. this is truly what is happening. sf businesses and politicians please don't parent me and i have two amazing parents and pretty big shoes you won't be able to fill. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> my name is russell mills and i live in the castro area for 30 years. the proposed nudity ban is unnecessary and reckless. it's unnecessary because it impacts the whole city in order to solve a minor problem at one corner in the castro. it's wreck else because the publicity can damage san francisco's tourist business. this city has three events that is famous for clothing optional. together these three events draw about one and a half million attendees each year. many are visitors from out of town and stay at san francisco hotels and restaurants and go sightseeing and buy things here. these events are very important to san francisco's businesses and it w
stories that the fence blew down in my yard, the tree hangs over my house, nonconforming in-laws, notice of violations, abatements, etc. these are issues that i am familiar with and have ample experience in with. i have been the trusted advisor and the go to guy to most of my clients, friends and family. i worked diligently with parties that have differing opinions and objectives and strive to reach a common goal. i think that has always been my mission. i understand how intimidating this process can be especially if english is not your native language. i feel that board members have an obligation to try to level the playing field. not everyone that comes to the board has the means of resources to have representation on their side. i will also be aware that the board of appeals is a quasi judicial body and the positions of the final review for san franciscans. my approach as a board member is to do my due diligence, work with my fellow commissioners, at the meetings and resolve complex. my interest in serving aboard a simple: i love the city, the culture, the diversity, the
. >> thank you. next speaker. >>> good afternoon, supervisors. local law student interested in environmental law and avid golfer. i support this resolution because it rejects legitimate attempts to [speaker not understood]. given the information forcing requirements of ceqa, this resolution should be passed. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker. if there's anyone else that would like to speak, please come forward. >>> supervisors, my name is al markel. i've lived in san francisco all my life and i played golf a good part of it. i urge you to -- a no vote on this resolution. [speaker not understood]. all this does is waste more time and money. so, let's get on with it. >> thank you. next speaker. >>> my name is victor car michael and i live in pacifica, california. my position is it makes no sense at all to merge these two studies. they are completely different entities. the sharp park redevelopment should be separated for two specific reasons. one is the golf course within the sharp park area is located right on top of a [speaker not understood] area. that complicates the e-i-r a
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 152 (some duplicates have been removed)